- From: Sander Tekelenburg <st@isoc.nl>
- Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 00:29:35 +0200
- To: <public-html@w3.org>
At 16:02 +0100 UTC, on 2007-08-07, Philip TAYLOR wrote: [...] > We use constructs such as this to (a) advise > users that a page has moved (explicitly), > and (b) take them to that page automatically [...] > > Could you explain to me the negative effect this > might have on someone dependent on uncompromised > accessibility ? The problem is that you're making an assumption about how long the user needs to consume your advice -- yet you cannot know this as an author. (The user may be a slow reader; may be a slow reader in your language; plenty of other cases to imagine, when you stop to think about it.) Thus your Refresh defeats your own stated purpose of advicing the user. When there is a good reason for such advice, it's best to leave it to the user to decide how quick or how slow to follow you along. Using a refresh in such cases is like giving someone a book and dictate at what speed he must read it. Still, while I consider this bad authoring practice, IMO the most sensible solution is for UAs to allow users to disable Refresh. -- Sander Tekelenburg The Web Repair Initiative: <http://webrepair.org/>
Received on Tuesday, 7 August 2007 22:39:25 UTC